Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A male will still be a husband, and a female will still be a wife.
I will be a wife, and I will have a wife.
My friend will be a husband, and have a husband.
My other friend will be a wife, and have a husband.
The only change is on a legal document. No one is telling you how you have to label yourself.
Yet.
But as I said before, I expect that 'husband' and 'wife' will be dropped from use in spheres such as workplace, school, and gov't. They are not gender neutral. Just take note of the demand by Gizmo that the same language apply to EVERY couple.
Maybe it won't play out that way. But it's a logical consequence of the path we are taking. Time will tell.
I do not and did not want god involved in my marriage, I do not believe in god. Civil unions are banned for us too and in some states we are not even allowed domestic partnerships. Of course we want equality, who in the US does not want it or expect it, we vote, we pay taxes, we work, we are people too, we deserve the same equal rights, not denied them or given a separate set. And if a church such as the Uniterian church wants to perform gay marriages, why should they be subjected to the rules of another church? Why should the christian church be deemed the end all religion and all the rest must bow down to it?
OK, but unlike you many homosexual people do believe in gods and want that blessing so to speak. After all, gays and lesbians are not automatically liberal as some people tend to think. Some of them are pretty conservative, which might seem contradictory at first glance.
OK, but unlike you many homosexual people do believe in gods and want that blessing so to speak. After all, gays and lesbians are not automatically liberal as some people tend to think. Some of them are pretty conservative, which might seem contradictory at first glance.
And as such, there are churches, even Christian ones, who do not believe gay marriage is a sin and should be banned, and will marry gay couples.
But as I said before, I expect that 'husband' and 'wife' will be dropped from use in spheres such as workplace, school, and gov't. They are not gender neutral. Just take note of the demand by Gizmo that the same language apply to EVERY couple.
Maybe it won't play out that way. But it's a logical consequence of the path we are taking. Time will tell.
On forms? Yeah, many places have forms that say applicant and then a place for "spouse". This is done because the applicant, or first person on the form, could be male or female. so the spouse could be male or female.
In personal relations, talking, introductions, husband or wife are descriptive terms. If we were going gender neutral then no one would be allowed to say he, she, hers, his... This makes no sense, as they are also descriptive terms.
And I believe what Gizmo is saying is that there should be ONE civil union that is recognized by the government. Marriage, civil union, whatever. But ONE law, ONE title.
I don't have a female drivers license, or a lesbian drivers license, or a female birth certificate.
Which is about as controversial as a baby sighing.
I predict this will never happen, as the prediction is stupid and just plain paranoid.
I seriously can't believe these anti-gay people. They act like their own marriages are going to be destroyed because, heaven forbid, two people of the same sex get married
But as I said before, I expect that 'husband' and 'wife' will be dropped from use in spheres such as workplace, school, and gov't. They are not gender neutral. Just take note of the demand by Gizmo that the same language apply to EVERY couple.
Maybe it won't play out that way. But it's a logical consequence of the path we are taking. Time will tell.
Congrats on winning the award for most idiotic thing to worry about in our society.
I seriously can't believe these anti-gay people. They act like their own marriages are going to be destroyed because, heaven forbid, two people of the same sex get married
Nighttrain. Looks like we agree again. I'm as straight as they come, and in a heterosexual marriage, and to me what 2 consenting adults do, whether they're the same sex, or opposite sex, has no impact on my relationship with my wife. And considering divorce rates amongst us straight people are skyrocketing, perhaps us straight people should worry about our own problems with marriage to worry about 2 people of the same sex getting married. I personally think that the government has no business in the marriage business, and legislating morality.
OK, but unlike you many homosexual people do believe in gods and want that blessing so to speak. After all, gays and lesbians are not automatically liberal as some people tend to think. Some of them are pretty conservative, which might seem contradictory at first glance.
There's nothing contradictory on its face about being "gay" and "conservative".... in fact, many gays would probably be happy to vote for fiscally conservative candidates, but usually you can't get fiscal conservative in politics without the crazy baggage of anti-gay religion.
And things such as gay rights, marriage.... are ECONOMIC considerations for gay people as much as they are civil rights considerations. So while many Republicans fret over whether to raise taxes on the rich or give them tax cuts, gay people are hit and effected in their pocketbooks by discrimination every day.
I seriously can't believe these anti-gay people. They act like their own marriages are going to be destroyed because, heaven forbid, two people of the same sex get married
Nobody is "acting like" anything. What does that even mean. And where did I ever say that I was "worried" about this. As I posted before, I don't care what 2, 3, or more consenting adults want to do. (I just wish that Seattle libs would take the same attitude towards strip clubs).
I just find it interesting what a linguistic mess we create when we insist on re-defining words. That's all. The ST columnist (who, according to a previous poster happens to be pro- "gay marriage") found it interesting too. Do you find him 'idiotic,' and 'acting like' as well?
Nobody is "acting like" anything. What does that even mean. And where did I ever say that I was "worried" about this. As I posted before, I don't care what 2, 3, or more consenting adults want to do. (I just wish that Seattle libs would take the same attitude towards strip clubs).
I just find it interesting what a linguistic mess we create when we insist on re-defining words. That's all. The ST columnist (who, according to a previous poster happens to be pro- "gay marriage") found it interesting too. Do you find him 'idiotic,' and 'acting like' as well?
What linguistic mess? How is spouse 1 and spouse 2 a mess? Both are spouses.
Applicant 1 and applicant 2. Both are applicants.
Person 1 and person 2. Both are people.
Where as bride and groom doesn't work for everyone getting married. Some are groom and groom. Some are bride and bride. Some are bride and groom.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
